Baroness Nicholson 'cancelled' by Booker board

I am finding it hard to see through the red mist on this one. It's my industry and I'm sickened by the pandering and the virtue-signalling hypocrisy, and my own inability to say anything.

To be openly ageist and sexist seems to be the new way of signalling wokeness.

It's shameful and disturbing.

For comparison, look how politely Lord Faulkner, Lord Cashman and the Bishop of Chelmsford discussed same sex marriage exemptions and the C of E, just last year.

www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2019/8-february/news/uk/peer-tries-to-remove-c-of-e-s-same-sex-marriage-exemption

Baroness Nicholson only had the role because she was married to the boss. Hardly something she had achieved through her greatness in publishing.

Maybe, like many Americans, he is viewing this from an American point of view and thinks there is an active campaign to end same sex marriage in the UK?

This is how they've been trying to frame it I think. Rather than what it actually is - a Baroness taking part in a democratic vote in the House of Lords - along with many others - many years ago.

It's another campaign of misinformation.

Are they going to root out every Lord who voted against it? No of course they're not.

Part of a review of Marlon James' work from a self-confessed fanboy.

It's quite clear that by cancelling her on this issue they can disregard her entirely from all other issues. They will point to this and say it is unacceptable to deal with a known homophobe and as if by magic all the criticism of self id and puberty blockers can be ignored. Cancel culture at its most sinister.

Maybe, like many Americans, he is viewing this from an American point of view and thinks there is an active campaign to end same sex marriage in the UK?

Fuck only knows. His words don't make any sense. Just seems to be random anger, splurged out at any older woman he deems unsatisfactory.

Marlon James is actually Jamaican and grew up in Jamaica. That's the culture he professes to identify with -- or once did.

He seems to still have Jamaican nationality, although living in America.

Maybe, like many Americans, he is viewing this from an American point of view and thinks there is an active campaign to end same sex marriage in the UK?

Thanks Merrymouse. It's all far less confusing now -- the Times quote made no sense. What an extraordinary statement from an author!
Indeed: Burn the Witch!
I never liked Marlon James, what I read of and about him -- there was something extremely misogynistic about him. Seems my instinct was correct.

Marlon James is American. Getting quite tired of American men wading into UK issues and demanding the heads of UK women.

Yes this.

Marlon James is American. Getting quite tired of American men wading into UK issues and demanding the heads of UK women.

www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/24/authors-call-for-removal-of-emma-nicholson-booker-prize-foundation-over-homophobic-views

That quote was from the Guardian.

and condemn HER

How chilling. "Burn the Witch!!"

Marlon James is calling for public condemnation. I see.

His erasure? Of what? Who even is he? Off to google ...

This is the full quote from Marlon James

"Former winner Marlon James, who took the prize in 2015 for A Brief History of Seven Killings, also slammed the Booker’s response. “While we’re at it, as a Booker prize winner myself, lets talk about your shitty response to having a hate monger on your board,” he said on Facebook. “It’s not enough to distance yourself from her views, you have to distance yourself from her and condemn HER. There’s certain kind of supposed liberal/moderate who still thinks that speech calling for my erasure deserves as much rights as speech call for my survival. Don’t be those people.”"

It's not clear how Baronness Nicholson is calling for anyone's erasure.

The last thing I am aware of the Baroness achieving (on a very long list of quite extraordinary lifetime achievements) is having ASDA withdraw materials that could be seen to damage safeguarding (at best) and promote pedophilia (at worst).

What was the reason behind the campaign to get her 'cancelled'? For voting on gay marriage? She has been cancelled for exercising her democratic right. I would probably disagree with her on this topic, but disagreement doesn't mean she has to be purged, for goodness sake. Voting against a motion that passed doesn't mean one is suddenly a pariah.

By this logic, anyone who voted to remain in Europe should be excommunicated forthwith.

The more I think and read about this, the angrier I get.

Agreed Jemima. Also sounds like they're getting rid of everyone with that position just to cover their own asses so they can't be accused of targeting just her, although they clearly are, because she works with and stands with JK Rowling, who the TRAs can't do a thing about; so the next best thing is they target her allies. Not any allies though. Just the women.

Arseholes.

From the Times article:

"revealing on Twitter that she had voted against the same-sex marriage bill in 2013 because she believed that it would “lead to degrading the status of women and of girls”."

This really is getting ridiculous. So what if she once voted in a way I don't agree with? I assume that's true of many other politicians also, some of whom share my interest in literature. Unless she's been actively promoting homophobic books it's just not relevant.

This Year Zero shit really does need to stop.

I don't understand what her tweet about marriage and girls and women meant, but I think that just shows the limits of twitter.

I haven't seen that tweet. My interpretation of her reasons is based on some tweets she made a few weeks back.

She's been quite clear on her view of marriage equality and why she voted against.

And the work to create an institution that was equivalent to marriage, and which some people prefer to marriage, had already been done by the Labour government in 2004.

I don't understand what her tweet about marriage and girls and women meant, but I think that just shows the limits of twitter.

The last para of the Times article:

The former Booker winner Marlon James, who took the prize in 2015 for A Brief History of Seven Killings, criticised its response. He said: “There’s a certain kind of supposed liberal/moderate who still thinks that speech calling for my erasure deserves as much rights as speech call for my survival. Don’t be those people.”

I'm not quite sure what he is saying here; it sounds contradictory at first glance. Can somebody interpret?

She's been quite clear on her view of marriage equality and why she voted against. She voted against for religious reasons because as many religious people do still believes in the eyes of God marriage is one man/one woman.

I disagree with her because I'm not religious so it doesn't matter to me what God or the bible might think.

I think it's a mistake to assume everyone who takes this stance has hatred for gay people because I don't think she does. She's experienced many countries and cultures in her life (her CV is quite extraordinary) and I believe capable of taking a nuanced stance in recognising marriage equality is a settled issue even though her personal opinion doesn't line up.